Beowulf. Das älteste deutsche Epos. Uebersetzt und erläutert von Dr.
Karl Simrock. Stuttgart und Augsburg: J. G. Cotta’scher Verlag, 1859.
8vo, pp. iv, 203.
Third German Translation. Imitative Measures.
_Simrock._
Dr. Karl Simrock (1802-1876) brought to the translation of _Beowulf_ the
thorough knowledge of a scholar, the fine feeling and technique of a
poet, and an enviable reputation as a translator of Old German poetry.
At the time when he made his translation of _Beowulf_, he was Professor
of Old German Literature at Bonn, whither he had been called because of
his contributions to the study of Old German mythology. His title to
remembrance rests, however, on his metrical rendering of the
_Nibelungenlied_, a work which, in 1892, had passed into its
fifty-second edition. As an original poet, Simrock is remembered for his
_Wieland der Schmied_ (1835), and _Gedichte_ (1844).
_Object of the Translation._
Simrock wished to do for _Beowulf_ what he had done for the
_Nibelungenlied_, _Walther von der Vogelweide_, and _Der arme Heinrich_.
He objected to the too literal work of Ettmüller[1] and Grein[2], hoping
in his own work to make the poem readable and to dispense with a ‘note
for every third word’:
‘Geist und Stimmung einer fernen Heldenzeit anklingen zu lassen,
und doch dem Ausdruck die frische Farbe des Lebens zu verleihen.’
--Vorrede, iii.
In this ambition he was justified by his success as a translator of Old
German poetry.
_Nature of the Translation._
The diction of the version is, on the whole, characterized by simplicity
and ease. Yet the author, like many another translator of Old English,
tries to give his style an archaic tinge by preserving the compound
forms characteristic of that language, such as Lustholz, Aelgelage,
Kampfrunen, a fault that Ettmüller had carried to excess. These forms he
sometimes used to the exclusion of simpler, or even more literal, words.
The nature of the German language, however, keeps these from being as
repulsive as they are in English, but they are sufficiently strange to
mystify and annoy the reader.
The feature of his translation for which Simrock was most concerned was
the measure:
‘Vor Allem aber den Wohllaut, der echter Poesie unzertrennlich
verbunden ist, das schien mir die erste Bedingung, damit der Leser
... den Sinn ahne und von der Schönheit des Gedichts ergriffen
von Blatt zu Blatt getragen werde. Nur so glaubte ich eine
tausendjährige Kluft überbrücken und dieser mit Angeln und Sachsen
ausgewanderten Dichtung neues Heimatsrecht bei uns erwerben zu
können.’ --Vorrede, iii, iv.
He also preserved alliteration, believing that a fondness for that
poetic adornment may be easily acquired, and that it is by no means
inconsistent with the genius of modern tongues.
_Relation of Translation and other Parts of the Book._
The notes to the translation contain discussions of the episodes and of
the mythological personages of the poem. There is a discussion of the
poetic worth of _Beowulf_, and an argument for the German origin of the
poem. But the translation is the _raison d’être_ of the volume, and
other parts are strictly subordinated to it. The Finnsburg fragment is
inserted at the end of section 16. As the author does not wish to
disturb the order of _Beowulf_, he is obliged to place the poem at the
end of the Finnsburg episode (in _Beowulf_), a very ill-chosen position,
where it can only confuse the general reader more than the obscure lines
to which it is related. This practice of inserting the Finnsburg
fragment, lately revived by Hoffmann[3], has been generally repudiated.
_Text, and Indebtedness to Preceding Scholars._
The text followed is Grein’s (1857)[4]. The translator acknowledges his
indebtedness to the versions of Ettmüller and Grein.